-i want to know what part of this you don't get. i mean, you are directly responsible for building the future of san francisco on the wrong track with your inability to manage the city's growth. and you are also responsible for the loss of artist spaces, cell space, lunacy, women's theatre collective, treehouse gallery, 340 bryant, the museum of craft and i think belcher street arts studios, johnson's center for the arts, café-sound factory, automobile, tool and die, the lap, studio four, the receiver space new color century, and i could go on and on. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is-rule i am a

parent at marshall elementary school which is a spanish immersion school in the mission. i want to emphasize to you that the vast majority of people who will be impacted by your decision tonight are not here. they are the spanish speaking families of the mission. and they are not here to express the extent to which this is a community under siege. i have been working with 2020 going to meetings for over a year and of all the cars are projects that are in the pipeline now to build 2000 market rate units in the mission are approved map 2020 will be an abysmal failure. the mission will be destroyed. you

have discretionary power to determine that this project is not beneficial to the community and is not consistent with maintaining the character of this neighborhood. i know that you often say that you can't say no to projects you don't have the legal authority, but until the developers are suing you, i don't think you pushed the envelope and i don't think you can sue pursued it in a long time. the community is begging you to, please, do not let the mission the destroyed. the mission is a unique community in the entire united states. i live in cities all over. new york, boston, new orleans, chicago, denver. there is not a mission district like the mission district anywhere else in the united states. it is a cultural gem, and in the

next six months, if you do not act responsibly, it will be gone forever. you have a responsibility. this is about values. this is a city that embraces diversity. we love the mission. even the people who don't live in the mission of the mission, and we are here begging you, please, you have the power to shape the future. don't abandon your responsibilities. stand with this community that is begging you to support them and tonight this project in its current form. thank you. >> hello, commissioners. my name is jonathan-good luck with

the project is proposed as a vibrant industrial and art public good in 1994 i moved into a live work art studio at 2040 bryant where i lived for the next 16 years. it was about a 10,000 square-foot t-shirt factory on the same block was a machine shop another 10,000 ft.2 providing high-paying jobs to over 20 skilled machinist. on the other side of us with the american conservatory theater, which was occupied 20,000 ft.2 for over 30 years as a scene shop employing 20 theater carpenters painters and other crafts people. the rest of lockout is small industrial buildings, detroit house, tortilla flat san francisco auto which was the only garage use of the tools and their left for do-it-yourself mechanics. in 1996 we took over the warehouse below 2050 bryant, after three months of design community envisioned, we open the mixed-use collaborative art center the arts discipline

under one roof. because of the cell space. i figured it would be important. for the same. about a number of times that you may not have been there. i want to offer you a little perspective. in that space we had a performance space could we had rehearsal space. the classroom and workshop space. we had a gallery. it studio several different artistic disciplines. with a communal our workspace in metal. wood, sewing, puppetry, sound video crafts with community are programs throughout the city. community centers, parks, and other places. youth programs at the bryant elementary, at the sro, that use enterprise and arts coalition, which was a collision of bay area organizations serving young artists and entrepreneurs. with a mission village market which was an art form and fleamarket get with the mission arts program which provided comments of afterschool programming for

at-risk youth age 13-19. with a clean fuel caravan coalition which pushed the envelope of biofuel at a time everyone thought will was the one the way for fuel. we the esperanza sustainability center which was a reputable education center for urban have a culture and sustainability. this is a place that was vibrant. i know i only have 30 seconds left in isa met all this mature which is just a smattering so you can go over this over 80 articles from just the beast on bryant in the last two years. this is obviously a hot topic. i urge you to also look at the contravention that this plan this project violates could the missionary contravention,, too many to go through. the san francisco general plan arts almond and my last 9 seconds i urge you to nor the text from the mayor and to vote with their conscience and vote with your heart. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hello, planning commission.

i'm waiting for the 3 min. to begin. every was kind of waiting. the lawyers are playing again. you guys are sacrificing the warriors game. to sit here all day to sacrifice this warriors game. so i want to just say, why do we live in a world where it's okay to profit from other people's illness? drug addiction, homelessness, was a serious problem in this city doing it we're going to get rid of them is no ties the police that's been very successful. very successful so far. lots of murders in the city. why? to say these are two different things, get a clue. okay? this is happening in chinatown

different story. the city requires the response of all of its people at this time to stand together. the old guard is shifting. so, what is the cure for this addiction to money? right? the trouble that creates someone else someone stroke rate someone else's opportunity. well, we are victims as artists of the tech world and money opportunity. you can shift this script and we can do it collectively. i sent last time and i'll say it again. there's way to crowd from there still ways to get union employee. this is not a good economy or a polarity. we are an entire city and we can work together.. it's a moral issue. for so few to have so much and so many to have so little. if we were doing alright it would be fine, but we are not doing alright to have this much wealth bulletin that much property could you

know that. this is setting a precedent. you can change the precedent with this boat. vote. all those people have been dispossessed will be coming to the front of city hall as they have been consistently and is going to get rougher unless you change this course. this is your vote not the mayors. he's [inaudible] this is your vote. so, what the percentage of people were not doing alright in the city? i wish i had the fact. how many people are making under $100,000 in the city? i wish had the fax. what percentage of addicted youth other in the city? i wish i had the fact that percentage of homeless youth in the city? which i had the fact that they're there and you know them. so, this is not a threat. it simply an observation that it's coming and please be on

the right side of it. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening pres. fong i commission. on june so mean this a native san francisco porn and raise in the mission district of it in san francisco my entire life. commissioners, we have a situation here that you here every week. this is about san francisco maintaining a presence here. all of you have been given the privilege of making sure that everybody is served. this developer could have done much better. so i'm here asking this commission to send this developer, this for-profit developer back to the drawing board. there are things that were left on the table but he can certainly provide this community. please, note that there's a reason why the san francisco building construction trades council opposes this project and

supports the community. to the credit of this community, this community from day one has asked this developer to make sure this is a 100% union project. that's why i am here because everybody should be served. not just members of the carpenters union, everybody. if there's to be union solidarity in the study this is still a labor town. i have been a member of the brotherhood of carpenters for 45 years, and am a little ashamed of what j bradshaw in the northern california carpenters regional council is doing your jaded jd bradshaw being the director of the northern california carpenters regional council does not live here and neither do his subordinates. we are the stakeholders. we are the people that live here. we are the people that trying to maintain

a presence here. we are the people that work here. commissioners, at the privilege and honor of serving on this prestigious panel. shortly after i was sworn in one of things we did we started an effort to create the ipc. in order to protect pdr. one of the things i did with the planning staff with to get the planning commissioners out to the likes of-who been here for 114 years. an agreement inside the shop and outside under the carpenters. 114 years. all the woodwork you see this building was done by franken schiller. when this building was first built. and again they came back and did it again. design workshop was here for 57 years, all good union paying jobs with benefits. so, we are trying to protect the blue-collar folks. we have over 200 people on the auto work list. local 22, which is 134 years old, lost 1100 members in the last 2.5 years at a time when we have billions and billions of dollars. the

northern california region's counsel doesn't care about the rank-and-file members. it cares about the union contractor that builds the theater project next omission. they promise the community a lot and gave them nothing. please, commissioners, do the right thing. we are san francisco. send it back to the drawing board. thank you so much. >> okay were going to ask folks to keep applause down, cheers down. i realize it some passionate comments in it but if you can keep your comments to yourself that would be great. thank you. >> hi. my name is marie laurence and i am god will save the mission, the beauty on bryant, and i have a little something to read. cities are thrown off balance when there's too much of one particular lifestyle and income bracket. i'm not against posh living. unless it hinders un-posh life

started living less money is worth it to many when the job is close to home. it is a different form of wealth. pushing out nearly all low-wage earners to the extended bay area limits causes greater poverty and isolation, which detours collaboration. families and communities are systems and systems work harmonically as music is always the some of the notes collaborating. not waging a war against each other or one upping the other. like gardens, there's always many helpers and more diversity man is clearly at the surface and right now, invasive plants are dominating the native flora of san

francisco. this is city is always been wild and i'd like you to personally make it your business to return it to a more humanely wild state of being. your decision significantly affects the garden that is our problem. stop forcing people to become warriors for basic rights. we can all live together with more patience and perspective. it is many people's perspective that you have been convinced that treating the city like a spreadsheet, rather than an urban garden. we need a more holistic approach to cultural preservation and urban planning. what has been happening is divisive and not

unifying. collaboration, cultivates communication, community creativeness creativity and kindness. we need more housing for $50,000 a year households and even some for the $10,000 a year households. and no more one-$10 million households. taking money of the rich weeds to stomp out the flowers is not a san francisco treats. thank you. and, this work is not pdr no matter what o'dell tells you. thank you. >> hello, commissioners. i've spoken to you in recent weeks and you'll probably recognize some of the things i'm going to say because i've said them at other times i feel the need to get on the record on this project are mine and his recall. remember i live in the

trail and i work in the mission. you know my heart is with the people that are the long-time residents here that are being impacted and displaced. and you know that i believe social economics should be strong consideration in planning a city. i remain critical of the implementation of the eastern neighborhoods land in that there was no concept of pace in it, but now the over paste approval have brought us to the point where the plan is obsolete. thus, the cpe for this project cannot be approved. i watched the hearing a few weeks ago and i learned that you couldn't get a clear explanation of when a cpe would not be able to be approved under the-would not be able to

remove from discussing physical things like number of units and square feet of pdr loss through some kind of amorphous well we convert that into people and then we sort of watch what's happening etc., and the this year we never bring forward a cpe to you guys that we don't feel is right. you cannot use this standard to approve the cpe for this project. thank you. >> hello, commissioners. i've spoken to before on behalf of my small business. [inaudible]. today i'm speaking on behalf of myself and my artist colleagues who don't have the time to come to commission meetings. i've

lived and performed in various methodologies in my life in the mission for over 10 years. in those 10 years, i've seen dozens of performance like the one being built over by the bryant project the cell space could i've seen dozens of those spaces removed there's nothing to protect them. i've seen 8% of my performers friends, colleagues, two generations of performers with performing in some capacity in cell space which was in the mission either get evicted, move away, or just give up their art because it is not financially viable in this town. there are many

protections for housing for wealthy housing for people with money. there's no protections for artists and artists is maybe too late for cell space, but it's not too late for the surviving artist spaces. i've been working in the mission for many many years and it's the epicenter of gentrification of people in the country and the world is looking at us. the mission, i been told by the chamber of commerce, people want to come to the mission for arts and culture. for the small business. for the community. we can't have arts and culture in this town if we are removing arts and culture spaces for luxury housing. unlike housing, we can rebuild 30 years of culture and connected to a neighborhood. once you remove that it's gone. my friends of performers scuttled were in cell space up until the end done alameda right now and not coming back. that's one of the premier circus groups in the bay area. now they're in alameda. they're not part of san francisco. at this point, i

don't think we can make a new one right now i'm especially avalos performance spaces, which i can't think of any of that size right now. love our jews the show i dove i would take it. to alameda, maybe? this might be too late for cell space, but speaking for my heart for my artist friends, to really consider all the people and the performers and the artists and the culture makers were impacted by projects like these. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is cindy sagan and him with a mission collaborative community service. i moved to my hometown segment 02 san francisco and 76 as a single mother with a three-year-old daughter and a college degree in fine arts. i

found a new home offering me a dream come true were over 14 years i earned that a top photographic makeup artists in downtown san francisco. during this time i became a member cell space community were met in 1991 a british immigrant a grade of house music who brought color into my black and white world after my parents had died in a car accident that you. my daughter has since moved back to segment a because she's [inaudible] was the next little manhattan. between 2008 and 2012 i received two separate cancer diagnoses these kind of like having to say i survived what i been livg in an 8 x 12 for $610 a month. i live in the mission district for three years now where my landlord has recent rented room above me identical to mine for $800. since i've lived in the mission, i've come to love

latino culture, their families the restaurants musicians, and most important thing their hearts. where are we underprivileged minorities to go on were forced to have 3-4 jobs to survive? so much what san francisco has represented from the get-go. i urge you to vote from the heart. thank you. >> good evening, pres. fong i commissioners did my name is adrian seen a good guild representative and lead organizer here in san francisco . i'm going to call this tonight what it is. this is how much money and what can we squeeze out of the go dell. that's all this is. but smoke and mirrors. i had to go down the road but that's what it is. the truth is, and you heard it from my director j bradshaw, couple hours ago, we sealed

this do get we didn't always have a deal. a couple years ago we had we were 180° from a deal. but you know what, he thinks that. the carpenters went out. go ahead and set up behind me. every commentor in here, i heard 2.5-3 hours ago i heard something about skin in the game get to icy skin in the game? that's what skin in the game looks like. these people are out there on the street good we got this commitment, the carpenters got this commitment for mr. o'dell. now were working together with our signatory general contractor. that's the way it is. you know? that's just the way it is and it's not going to change because in every issue in san francisco, 9/10 issues in san francisco, labor issues, the carpenters are the ones doing the work. you know what the were the ones getting the work.

it's going to remain that way. i just want to say, i believe we have an obligation to approve this project on its merits good i expect to see that. i hope to see that and thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> the clocks is a minute and i'll start talking. hello my name is scott hyper. i was among a large team of the cofounders of cell space originally back in the mid-90s. i've invested tens of thousand dollars in the space, hundreds of thousands of personal time and commitment and help coordinate what became really a beacon for grade of arts in san francisco. emotional about the space. pictured in the front of the mission neighborhoods plan. represents what arts was because it is over now. that particular entity wasn't even

get summary got about this project so has evolved tremendously from our subject went to the first community meetings were basically brought up about the art space and nick o'dell said my building is the art. the carpenter units if they were better at the beginning there were not getting the project mrs. the committee has forced the development to the table. the company and adjuster behind the project to begin with and it's really sad to see them breaking into the brothers and sisters in the labor trade unions by taking the stance. another billboards out in front of city hall rainout that i think are legal but the carpenters union install. if they can't do that i like confirmation. more art in front of city hall when using the unlike more confirmation if those unsung legal. it's tough. were really losing tremendous resource of it i'm also disappointed with the mission creek merchants because the reason the block is

blighted nick o'dell has addicted everyone from the site. i have the legal cases there proving his past residential uses could i myself was a resident of that element of doctors present and 21. i believe during the first dock, error. again i've got some legal cases you're showing past history. there was a squat there we had to eventually it at someone and reappropriate with nick o'dell depicting intermission from that space the other tenants upstairs. so the legal case president to show that was a residence upstairs with a guy considered in the new development. we ran a group artist residency program there about people from all the country over the world- only that paperwork with you and some other information. there's a lot going on to this project, can get into and 45 seconds. people here speak your

behalf of that directly economically benefit from the situation. the carpenters be honest not lived here by mistake in this. the competition be advocating for the people to be without homes or projects that their employees can find homes in the future but this project is not to serve the people beyond their paychecks when it's built they want any better situation for these populations afterwards. commissioner antonini you spoke about urban mixed-use and pvr should go where pdr is on can i think urban mixed-use it's mostly mixed-use site somebody to educate mr. antonini with the planning department applicants not that maintain jobs and spirit of it all right letters later. >> thank you. [calling names] is there any additional public comment? >> good evening, commissioned by ms. out plans. i am a carpenter. i put the covers you and i live in san francisco. i

used to live in the mission and i live in bayview hunters point. hearing all the people who are quite a long time have sort of considered my san francisco political tribe, there is the nipples on the heartstrings. it is no doubt about it did i think the stories we hear are real and i think the concerns of the people are real. we should not discount them, but as we consider this particular project, i want to ask you to take a step back. i want you about history, think about context and think about how this project has gone over the past three years. so it is that was first came out was to 74 units, 42 inclusionary units. everybody including us said this was not good enough. we went for the project at the time. working on the developer doing what carpenters do best that the covers organizing

department is best we turn this into a union general contractor commitments. we brought along labors. we brought along operating engineers with consistently offered to work to bring in other trades. about this process, though, but remember, some of the leaders here said no housing is better than some gentrified housing and some affordable housing but remember that the cognitive dissonance we have here that it's too big it's two out of scope, no, we want more. we can have both. we've got people complaining about thousands of people being displaced out of the mission. were not. who are really people are not here to talk about being to stay in san francisco. balsamic tennis we are doing against building 139 units of affordable housing. we have people who reference the mission eastern neighborhoods plan were never at the table when when the mission anti-displacement coalition coalition for arts and housing was fighting like hell to get these land dedication into the

plan. all of this stuff, this is part of the history of this project this part of the history of what's going on over here. we all sat around the table with these groups, with a lot of these folks, did anybody think that the block where so 's would not be [inaudible] no, we knew it was a bit did we miss it. maybe it was that. organist and eight years developing a plan, and then having that come across in the middle of it, and then completely throw it out when it comes time to start lamenting, then were never going to do anything. we have to do something. people, we have 139 families who will not live in the mission because somebody wants to preserve the low rise character of the neighborhood. thank you. >> sue has to, it's been a

long time in coming here. this is environmental document for this project. i participated in every step away in the appropriation of the eastern neighborhoods plan, the predecessor to the eastern neighborhoods plan. there are five places that we started with . these are neighborhoods plan eir, which had certain assumptions that have been effectively thrown out by the next [inaudible] because the eir led to the eastern neighborhood area plan including the mission plan, but then it got

effectively watered down and pdr protections were decimated because it came to the planning code. so, you have a eir good area plan. the planning code language then you have exceptions to the planning code. then, you have interpretations by the planner and so, when you go to the original assumption that were in the eir about looking at the mission, it wasn't a neighborhood of high-end commuters from silicon valley doing a reverse commute on buses into the mission taking with them the demand for housing but an expectation that would be really high-end housing provided in the mission for the people who lived in-who work in mountain view and had very big

incomes and buses to take them to san francisco. there was no assumption of buses dumping well educated and well income people in. at the same time, removing low income residents and low income jobs. go to the eastern neighborhoods eir and see if it's in there. go to eastern neighborhoods area plan and see if that is in it. it's not in there. i know because i was involved in developing it. instead, good planners that we are, we allow them to require exceptions. i have no confidence that the people who do the approval of these project read before they go to bed every night of the eir, the area plan for the mission,

really having internalized what we were trying to do. you are the institution that has to do it. you have to vote. just not approved this project. thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? public comment is closed and open of two commissioners. commissioner antonini >> first i like to ask a couple questions. ms. harley, could you please come up and reiterate what he said at the beginning of the hearing about the money being ready and available from the mayor's office one more time? >> yes. kim harley. we are ready to lease an rfp. is this budget is approved. we will include in that $2 million of predevelopment money and we have the construction funding lined up so, as soon as the selected developer which will do in the normal course as we do for mission projects, which we ask that about wanting to

include a community based developer once they are selected , got an architect to do the plans. though designed the building. though the community engagement. community outreach them apply for a permit to my then they can get started building right away but the money is reserved. it's there. it's available in on not sure why there is a thought it's not because it is. >> also, the project sponsor will deliver the site to you shovel ready? >> that's right. that's an additional financial benefit. >> yes, think. then, mr. richard zero great many could speak a little bit to the community plan exemption, which we've had and have used it all the eastern neighborhoods and it's being used today >> >> correct. as far as i know the committee planned extension still stands in the er i was responsible for sheltering implementation of the committee plan exemption and making sure it's consistent with the eastern neighborhoods eir.

>> normally is environmental not social changes that are involved in environmental impact study? thank you. appreciate it. so, i've been to the site a few times and i looks like it certainly is a project and this is a very good project. it's evolved tremendously from when it first started. nobody is even talk about the design, which is a beautiful designed 17 foot trade shops and retail height, which is very welcoming and very good for many uses including arts uses, where they need more heights and all kinds of other uses. i mean, that something that nobody has really talked about. 16 feet in the market rate sidekick 85 feet on the affordable because we can get the density bonus on the affordable piece. so, that makes it even better. you know, there's been a lot of talk about luxury husband i grew up

in a small town in the state. it was a girl in those days. we lived in modest house. a lot of houses were built were bigger homes and they were more expensive. we cannot afford him, but it was what was being built and someone was buying them and were living there and we were glad the town was going and made it more vital. we didn't really have any thought about it being luxury housing. it was nice housing and the people could afford to buy it. so, i don't think they're the same thing the market will determine what the price of the housing will be. the rental prices. as long as there is a demand, that housing rental price will probably fairly high, but the more of it is built below are the rental cost will get because there is eventually a satiation of the demand come a which you will be met to some degree if we finally start building something in the mission district which is another erroneous comment that we built hardly any housing in the

mission district over the last few years. for example, in terms of pdr use, help clarify what one speaker did not quite understand-there were $3.5 million square feet in the mission that is been reserved for pdr. another 3 million in the mission is urban mixed-use that does allow housing and retail and even pdr to be built in that area because this is the area from which the pdr, which we have planned, could be lost in the eastern neighborhoods plan will be taken. so, of course, even 100% housing development there is appropriate. it doesn't mean that every development has to have a bunch of different uses but it's the zone from which this will be taken. so far, only 8% were 241 thousand square foot of has been built

in the un view area in the mission. another 7%, which includes this project is in the pipeline. so, there's a total of 50% of the 3 million square feet there was allotted that is built or is planned to be built. those are the accurate figures of this particular time, so we are well within what we've allowed and this is a site that's totally appropriate for this. it builds more affordable housing at 139 units and has been built in the mission district since the year 2000. so, i think it does a lot of good things. of the 60% of the 139 units they'll be affordable, no more than the 60% out, no one mentioned the 30% of these are reserved for formerly homeless and special-needs people. so, it's even better than just an income

level ceiling, but it dictates that. 41% of this project is by land, is of the affordable parts. in terms of displacement, which there was a lot of talk about, was neither direct or indirect displacement. there were only three rental units on this property and if there's any doubt i'll call up staff to verify it, but everything i've read in the status report say that's the case. there were some people squatting there, but that doesn't really matter. that's not the case then we certainly will ask staff to correct it, but that is what there were. two of the units were occupied by owners and one was vacant when this project began. it's going to be

replaced not by three rent-controlled units. better, it's can be replaced by three below-market units which will always be affordable. they won't just be at a low rent when their first rented, but then the rent can go up with the market. there's also note indirect displacement. a lot of studies have been done. among them, ted egan's study in me, rally from the university of california, and the state comptroller's study have all said that new market rate housing in areas usually either slightly lowers the cost of the existing housing and the state comptroller study said up to 5.9%. so, you can probably find a study somewhere that says something different, but most of the studies agree and it only makes sense. that if you satiate part of the demand that is coming from the people who want to live in the mission, and other parts of the eastern neighborhoods by

building new housing that they can own or rent, they will be less apt to displace the people who are in the existing housing. in fact, in terms of a demolitions, i think the mission only accounted for 2.6% as opposed to a 3.5% citywide. so much lower rates within the mission. then, before this when this project first came up we had this community alternative and it asked for 36% of the land to be donated to the mayor's office and 10,000 ft.2 of pdr and use and we actually know c 41% donated and around

18,000 ft.2 of pdr and arts and various flex space. so, i think it does even more than what was asked, but as usual, as the case with the eastern neighborhoods, we five for 12 years to develop a plan and when you develop it luck people are not happy with the results. i mean, that's the walls. were living by the wolves and that's what this project does. in terms of the donation, it's been said about you that two $23 million. however, we did a pro rata based upon the price the city paper 490 s. van ness the which is 18.5 million, this project building and that was only 72 units, this is building 139 units, i believe, and i will be worth $34 million if you based upon that sale. so, it's certainly a big contribution. we've had talked about not building market rate housing. we've been down that road at the board of supervisors of the voters defeated it were 60% voting no. they be some parts of the city in some precincts they voted

yes, but we go citywide or we've citywide elections for those issues that's what the vote was. i hope those group are able to continue to work with the project sponsor and the other trades to make sure that when the contracts are left to the various soaps, they are all union. i mean, we can make that any kind of condition. i just hope that this continues to happen during the process. this will likely have other actions at the board of supervisors it it will take a little while for this to actually be finally approved, and i think there's some time to get those things worked out. because someone will get the contracts and some subs will get to them and i hope we can continue to work with-give preference to the union jobs if possible could that's not a condition if i'm just mentioning it because it came up in discussion. i think the

pro forma-mr.-could you answer a question for me, please? i believe is reported the pro forma showed a return of 5%. could you explain that a little? because of rental property has to be built and then it has to be granted those rents have to pay the construction don't get it seems it would take quite a few years before any money starts coming out on the profit side? >> sure good i'm no expert and pro forma but we did share pro forma with the mayor's office at the last two weeks and it's a very tight pro forma at this point. the return on that sprint is less than 6%. you can't finance something much lower than that. and the advocates in the meeting, when they were asked, what would you propose as a rate of return on an investment you might be able to raise, it was at that same level. so, there pro forma have

been shared. they are at the margin. anymore further land dedication, any cutback on the parking can be very much jeopardize the finance ability of the project >> stated that mr. o'dell is always insisted on is being rental which to me sounds harder because with condos, you saw them, you realize the money from the sale and you have a more rapid return and with a rental situation >> absolute. the rental budget you have to look at the long-term workability of the project to pay off-digit you don't see cash flow for quite a few years before you have enough income to comment to pay off the loan and start to realize income. were profit. thank you. then, couple things were brought up about some of the previous uses in this site. the-when the largest ones was production specialties and

they've now relocated two 2380 jared in san francisco. so that was one of the larger ones. then, the cell space for intermission. according to what i've been told had over $200,000 in rent credits and try to relocate in the mission. it did not work. they ended up becoming two separate companies mr. o'dell had offered to help them with relocation but the company fell apart before it was ever able to do that with the predecessors of the sequential property owned by, or the sequential companies. then, some of the other ones i have noted down here and read in the report, san francisco auto repair center, relocated two 3260 19th st., which right in the mission and received

$40,000 and relocation assistance. the greater floral design is relocated in sf with no assistance. we party talked about production specialties. we talked about intermission. candy a ct theme shop did what other companies are doing. i think the author is doing the same. though no longer became economically viable for them to produce their own things so they're farming it out to someone do it for them i'll share or somewhere but that something that was probably happen and get the rent was probably one of the only one of the components of their costs. 2005 café) they ceased operation in a row allowed to stay on for one more year. the landscape associates relocated two 3295 mission and they purchased the building, which i think is a very nice outcome

for that one. finally, architects sold the property located to another location in san francisco at 1653 10th ave. there's a lot of pr sites very close to this that are only pdr is allowed. among them the correct building, 145-155 cap. 540-353. as you go a block or so are right across the street and you have areas that are only pdr they were main only pdr. so, these are sites that are available or as you move further south towards caesar chavez there's lots of properties probably less expensive than the areas right around them. so, anyway, those are my comments. i'm very much in favor of the project pussy with the other commissioners have to say. >> if nobody else, i moved to

approve. commissioner wu >> i will make some comments about the affordable housing. i think that i just want to be clear what it is, right. i think land dedication has been an option that was thought of in eastern neighbors and we saw the project previously. it is true that the words of the land now is equivalent to howard made millions was populated but i just want to clear is shifting responsibility to emerge pd. it's trying to figure out how to think about it. it's not that you're building 41% of the units. is that the value was given to the city so that the city could put in the rp to build on it. it's just that slightly different on

the other projects we seen. so, i just want to make sure were calling it what it is. >> well, i think the land dedication you can look at it is on a modern offered to muster i think we look at a pro forma good time to do project that's bigger small. 41% in the dirt is a lot. given as we all know, with the cost of dirt in san francisco it's a lot. it could be more good news folks 150% it is folks don't want 100% but i think we are to keep in mind with all of the talk of more affordable housing, you're getting 139 units year. this arrogant that something that really has not been brought up. a couple different floating issues. a lot of the discussion on arts the preservation of arts and summit has been locket i understand that and summit can be saved. i like to maybe

throw out the idea that i want to be prescriptive, but throw out the idea some of the pdr space may be some affects pay some of the retail space be dedicated towards art space. there were some pretty passionate comments, speakers about performance-based, art gallery space protopic studio space, shared mixed-use kind of space. i think maybe were not going to get it all, blue nice to see some of the converted over to the ability to convert that over. so i like to throw tut. hat ou know, it's talking we just had an earlier discussion this morning about the need for preservation of units and added units and preserving units and here we are facing some for the units so market rate units. i think it's a really important piece to remember that these are rental units, all of them. the portable side as was the private side. will try to be if there were truly high-end for

purchase condos. these are going to roll up and down with the market and those of you who been long enough in san francisco you know it goes up and down. so, those are my comments. i will hear what other commissioners have to add to this. commissioner richards >> one of the things i had not realized is there's a lot of [inaudible] my apologies it's been 9.5 hours and 45 min. of sitting here. i guess, a question for the project sponsor maybe mr. fidel or mr. peddle. thank you. the giving of the land is equivalent to something in dollars could write? that's how were getting additional monies because were

getting land versus pain iffy. the original fee was just under 70% on-site. the value of the land, the question i have is, debugger today's dollars dollars you paid for it? >> the volume is in today's dollars >> today's dollars, okay. probably some appreciation in that. can you tell me about the nick hotel company, how many employees, where does it operate >> my housing builder now been operates here in san francisco on battery street. i try and build one project at a time. i've been building multiple family housing from was 35 years. i started working for my father. i work for him almost 20 years that an old-school ownership could our entire business is building rental housing. i was unable to do that after the.com closure for market reasons and built a few condos, but my business plan is to build rental housing. my investors long-term investors

>> sure. how many employees do you have? >> i have four. >> okay. we heard something from somebody in the community a gentleman who used to buy and sell space to i looked at your i guess was something in the report you sent an and i thank you for that, on the interim controls. one of the items is no page number says there is no recorded history of reductions or buyouts associate with the property with somebody get up-to-date two people get up today and save your people living in that sell space to run individual rooms. can you comment on that? >> i can. it's a messy and unpleasant story to preach in public, but when i purchased the property, we had assurances contact with the land so that was no residential uses in the building. we turned around and

signed new leases and received a stopple certificates for the tenants in the building including he intermission guides explicitly saying there was no residential tenants in the building. i did not go through every room in the warehouses to check. i relied on their written word in contract and verbal agreements, which i repeatedly asked them about because it's such a contentious and problematic issue to displace residents. about a year ago, we made a deal with the intermission guides to give them $1 million over five years for to sustain them over a five-year period and we try to i went and

negotiated the letter of intent level on two different spaces in the mission of them relocate and promised to pay the rent relocation expenses. we sign that up in june, i was a june of last year and about two weeks later, i found out that somebody had broken through the walls of the intermission into the former acp space. we would have to look at it and that had been overrun with squatters who wrote occupy slogans all over the walls and we were like, what is going on here. they fessed up they had been renting two people. that they knew were living there in violation of their word to me and the written agreements. we had-i then yelled at by members of the community for referring to the law, but i reverted to the

law and we were forced to go to court to get these guys out of not only the sole space with the place they broke into next-door. we went into court and the judge found in our favor of 6/7 counts but the law they had no right to be there at thisdays were in violation of their lease that the occupant squatters had no right to be there under the rent control law or any of the law in the city of san francisco. state of california. and they were not dwelling units. this was all done at court. through the passage of time, after that were during that process, the sole space guys lost their deal that they said. they were supposed to deliver the space

--move out on august 31. i forgot the exact date. but because of the passage of time and going to court and all the stuff, they lost million-dollar bill. within two weeks, but signing this thing they violated it and they lost it. so, the judge in the squatter occupancy found against them. they settled for-we settled -this is getting complicated, but we settled because there was still a liability, mostly to one of the members of the inter-patient partnership they could lose his house. the squatters, when they came to us and said let's negotiate, they wanted a quarter of $1 million relocation money we had promised initially. at that point, they lost their deal. they were out and i said guys, you're now the last thing on the list. but i have to deal with to get through the city. we will come back you when we

are done. that's where it stands. >> okay, thank you. i noticed that the parking for the 100% affordable is three-car shared spaces that the market rate housing is 85 spaces. or higher number. has a look at the floor plans, i see 7000 ft.2 of retail space. i see all the sparking pic this flex units. i'm kind of of the mindset that i really like to see more pdr space carved out of some of those things mentioned before i leave that with you. i think the other thing i'm closing on my mind is not a nick o'dell issue, i think at some point were to start feeling uncomfortable with these two neighborhood eir and the expo nation ms. jones gave me a thing for the 901 16th st. as i looked at the was handed in

today-and this is no indictment of staff-i trust their professionalism. what i have to compare my question against that i asked was, kind of the state density bonus law. it's a table we look at. it's as if you do this you get that. if you do that you get this. as i see the table handed in, on housing i can't say, well were way under on disruption of pdr but were over on medical. etc. etc. there's no formula. so, i don't quite understand this stake into the board or chords that'll compromise eight, yes, i certify this. summary told me. i still have a little bit of sense of uncomfortableness every sewer project we go through the now hearing the exact same drum but drumbeat from the communicative entries can go somewhere and summaries can have to make a decision on it and will come back while the real test case forward that i

feel uncomfortable right now at this point on this project on certification for sql. >> if i can respond, commissioned i think there's a real difference between projects that are under environmental review and projects that are completed. the figures you have are projects that are having completed. the not projects-in other words, those projects that maybe get built projects in the pipeline. what's been put on the run is a much smaller number. >> okay. >> was on the ground is well within that analysis of the neighborhood eir. >> so there's a table that's summer like this that's completed? >> it's entered on the charts commissioner about halfway down the charges he commented that says active-it's just not completed yet. >> got it. okay. that's all i have now. thank you very much. >> commissioner hillis >> first, i'm kind of a

broader issue of gentrification and the housing crisis, displacement and loss of our space, and we heard a lot of comments we don't think we don't take it seriously and we hear this every week we grapple with it every week. it's the reason why we collectively don't have a solution because it's an art issue. you can read about in an newspaper and in other cities grappling with the same issue. was an article recently in the new york times but aflac psych store been displaced from 57th st. which we all probably think is a gentrified neighborhood, but you can write that about anywhere in san francisco. i've had good conversations with folks from the mission about this in how we saw this i think we box ourselves in on this issue. developers also we can build our way out of it were folks in the neighborhood say somehow if we froze the city its physical form, somehow we would be with to keep it affordable were keeping every group here that is here. it's just not to. i'm happy to walk people around my neighborhood

not in the mission in the western addition could i've only lived there for 10 years and i've seen it in enormous amounts of displacement gentrification. worked on busy darrell anderson oh development happening there. that's happening naturally. so i think were economically we grapple with this if i thought to myself thereby stop nick o'dell on this project from going forward and somehow that would preserve the mission, i would do it. but the might of think that is true. i think we have to find solutions and the solutions are more difficult than stopping a google buzzword stopping a project from happening in the mission had the things like increasing the inclusionary housing percentage, which we've done in recommended and hopefully we'll see more units being built as you know, it's possible the eastern neighborhood zoning needs changing to provide more

space for arts organizations and to allow for more pdr uses. it's a look at revenue and taxes. which we will woefully underfunded arts in the city at i run in arts and cultural organization that provides space for nonprofit arts groups that one third of market and it's hard for us to keep doing it at the level of organizations that been there for 30, plus years because we provide the most stable plus space the dollar, dollar 50. if we disapprove this project were not getting a dollar 50 rent. it's just not happening. so, we committed to working on the solutions. i would love for us all to commit to work on the broader solutions of displacement in housing prices and gentrification in service fighting every project we got to week. were having our gives up the waterfront which the voters didn't pass this but somehow nothing's happened in store parking lot. we passed

the mission interim controls to why i voted for that i thought it was good it allowed us to make projects actually better. and spike and others i talk to you about that. i think this project has come a long way. a lot better than what we first saw it i remember the commission hearing six, plus months ago and are another meeting with mr. o'dell and with members of the canadian saying this is not a project any risk and support. so, i just want to recognize this project has come along way from its 50% inclusionary at ami etc. it'd percent were 1% to project were we actually have when i percent affordable housing and i give credit to any members of the community who fought for that. so, i think it's important to note

that. i still think it could go father. i agree with some of my commissioners on the that trade shop retail and pdr and are stated i think we are woefully providing additional space not to things because we make. shops are pdr space somehow can be affordable three chops [inaudible] will you need other mechanisms like nonprofit oxidant provided space would redo 441 housing to make it work. so, those are my general set of comments on the housing issues. on the project itself, if i can ask you, you got pdr uses in your project. about what percent of the ground floor do you have: do you anticipate-i know this isn't necessarily what you would propose the project but would

you anticipate as your ground-floor uses to be without one of percent affordable housing project? >> i think the proposed plan shows between seven and 10,000 and car share parking. that is a number that we think is good and viable and we are now building many of our projects without parking, so the general layout of the ground floor does make sense of the we party beach 02 arts groups to get a sense from them about what is the ideal amount of arts space for the ground floor so that we can flex up or flex down pain on the need and the desired new fitness for the community at i don't really have an answer for you in terms of the percentage but i think it's when presented does make sense and we want to work with the community and will ask the developer gets the moment rights to that site to

have a very strong community engagement process on that space because it is so important >> so 7000 of about how large of a foot on that site? >> it's in 19,000 square-foot site >> so nearly 50% or close to that? >> yes. that's about right. >> the question of when i think at i think it's an important question when this will be built and how it will be built. if the housing market were to kind of tank in and they could not get financing to do the project, can this project still go forward before the housing project? how do we does that work? when this title get transferred? >> well i would differ to the city attorney's office. i understanding a function similar to payment of an

[inaudible] three. first construction documents are marketed the developer does have to provide the site shovel ready to us. we have to enter into a purchase and sale agreement for a dollar. so there's very steps that have to go through. the point at which the title fee title does transfer to us, i believe, is before the developer can pull the permit. pull his permit and wait for the in new fee. but we can check on that for sure. >> we go forward and do developer selection and planning not know you have title to the property? >> if the developer gets approval then, yes, we would go forward and issue an rfp and go through the selection process, and we would be before we actually issue the $2 million we want to see that the-that

there was a good amount of certainty that the land was actually going to be transferred. we often times engage developers on parcels that are not exactly tied up because we want to-we take risks on a former housing developments all the time. we've unsecured loans. we know that sometimes they can't get state financing, that the projects are contingent upon. that would not be an unusual thing for us to issue the rfp advance of getting the titles. >> okay. i mean maybe i can ask, you could be more specific about when title could transfer and 10 of the uncertainties of the future housing market. i like to see this deal to move forward as uncertainty. >> i think the sequence of events would be, i mean, were entitled here and withstand any

appeals, you would negotiate a purchase and sale agreement between the adult company and mow for one dollar purchase price. there are board of supervisors would have told a hearing and approve a resolution approving a purchase and sale agreement. that could happen within the next several months. at that point, we would be in contact the city would have an enforceable contract to acquire the site. we wouldn't, at that point, we have to go through a adjustment to create the law here we can't do that until existing building is demolished. we can't record to the existing building is demolished. this would've a sequence of events. we would get our site permit and a demo permit, demolished the building, it poured on lot line adjustment to convey the title to vote but certainly, was the board of supervisors approved a purchase and sale agreement

they would have the legal ability to enforce that obligation that we would make that conveyance to the one dollar purchase price at a set time. probably right after demolition >> right after demolition and a remuneration work we have to do. >> okay. then to ms. hartley, thanks. there were questions about the above passage or alley that being on the future site. can you give us a way that is and who property that lands on? >> so, initially the line was drawn so that the may block alley was on the affordable side. we saw that as conferring good benefit to both parcels. that design made sense. by understanding now is from the city attorney's office is that if the line is the property line is drawn so that

the news goes over to the affordable side, it's actually a grant and long dedication that exceeds the required percentage of the developable parcel to such an extent that it runs into proposition c problems. i think the city attorney's office, and i don't want to speak for them-is advising that the market rate developer actually take mou take legal ownership of the mou and enter into an easement with the affordable parcel so that come again, nothing will change from the design, but the market rate owner will pierce possible for a. actually, that would be better. we want the open space for sure, but if the market rate developer has for sponsor billy four responsibility for anything that happens plus

maintenance, other responsibility attached to that that's better for the affordable parcel. >> right. okay that makes sense. then for mr. seacrest, can you tell us the total amount of ground floor retailer pdr space. there is a some places known as pdr and some is trade shop we joke and some is flex unit? >> correct >> i guess there's been discussions about converting some of that to pdr from flex unit. can you tell us where we are with how much pdr? >> just to clarify a little bit about the flex unit designation. the core of a flex unit is still dwelling units. so just a dwelling unit that lets you provide for some type of other alternate use but typically a retail use or small

office or something else that you can have in your dwelling units on top of a. at the core of it, is still considered a dwelling unit. based on the calculations project sponsor provided, it about 7000 ft.2 of retail or trade shop and a flexing between the two built over the three spaces, and then larger pdr space at about 3900 ft.2. >> in which zoning is more restrictive? >> the pdr piece would be more restrictive, basically. only those users will be allowed in under the zoning table would be allowed in that space. >> will be allowed in the trade shop. >> trade shop retail would be just typical retail uses. h up is a subset of retail basically. >> if we wanted to limit that tomorrow part bogus trade shop, i was under we had this discussion before-what is your device on the best way?

>> on a positive note of her to the city attorney of the commission can't limit them to a certain type of use on the ground floor. but if the commission and condition eight views on the ground floor is this the type away. >> president fong city attorney's office. i think with commissioner hillis is adjusting within a subset of permissible uses, it would be just some permissible- >> within a subset of pdr were studio uses would be allowed in pdr? >> yes. >> is there way for us to limit it to that to that subset of uses or some variants of that? words pdr kind of a most limiting category we can use?

>> i think would want to look at the planning code and just see what the restrictions are the first on the limitation on the planning commission's ability to do that. i think the commission staff may also a comment on this maybe some enforcement issues with either monitoring or ensuring that those uses can and will be inis, but it does seem that if the commission makes findings to support that narrower use, unless there's some limitation on the ability to do that in the code, that seems like a possible route for the commission to take it i just another code section. >> if i could answer that the trade shop designation does not a pdr. >> correct >> so the commission could for example, suggest that actually the pdr space rather than trade and that would be something because it's a different use category entirely, correct we pick >> correct

>> okay get all see what other commissioners have to say but i like to see not maximizing the pdr because of the loss of the art space so maximizing of pdr designated space on the ground floor in the trade shop retail café pdr and again we've had this issue of flex unit. i don't think there are we: flexing units. i think you're right. their core residential there's no requirement to use some sort of pdr but with that more flex at that level. >> mr. johnson >> thank you to everyone. appreciate all the comments. i would just out of my commes by saying that i am not in support of having nothing did so, i don't think that is the best option for anyone, anyone in the city. there's just a couple things i would say good i think is probably could come

later smoke first time we've seen it and i appreciate having spent time with mr. o'dell as well as community members. i appreciate all the effort that people put in. people have really put in blood sweat and tears to understand this project to try to model alternatives, to sit there and meet if they do not think they could get anywhere so i definitely can appreciate that having seen it firsthand. i will limit some of my comments, because of a four-month-old at home and it's 10:15 pm but i think other commissioners have really good at an eloquent on some of the issues we've heard today i agree with many of your comments. so just a couple things. before the housing piece, i think commissioner wu brought this up. there may have potential been an option with past [inaudible] with a private entity whether mr. o'dell's company were other partners build the affordable housing but i actually am supportive of

the band dedication going to the city through and it goes through their process. mostly we have some people love it and some people like it. some people have complained with that but there well honed system for having i plan projects that are built and will follow high-quality and they have a system for getting those that you can necessarily impose or you can ensure when you have affordable housing being developed by other partners. so, i appreciate that he system the city has and i think for this project it works. before you present land dedication, like commissioner fong said is a lot of is a lot of dirt for this project. i will focus my the rest of my comments on the pdr space and then have a short aside on the cpe. i also for many reasons

believe there needs to be more pdr space in this project. i understand-i actually have some experience in pro forma and i understand this one is getting to the line and every element that is there contributes to the return on this project, which he don't have up returned you don't have a project like i said i'm not supportive of having nothing here. however, i do think it's about and often uses term even though becomes up a lot in this room, i do think it's about preserving some of the neighborhood character and preserving space for nonprofits and space for the people that make the city the way it is. i think we need to preserve some of that with this new development could obviously, the 20 change the nature of change is preserving the essence of what the same we want even as you see new things coming up around you. i don't think this for every project we've seen in the eastern

neighborhoods, but i think for this one, this is one where it's a large block and given was around it i think we need to find ways to preserve the types of uses that are indicative formally indicative of that immediate area. that being said, i think i would be supportive-, go there. i don't know if i can be support of flex unit. they are residential. the dwelling units. like other dwelling unit types in the city, there's more than one. were they are supportive of having some type of business for example i'm thinking the units we've have family child care and things like that. you can't-that may be a possibility but you can go in and police work actual person or persons living there what they do with that base and they decide not to have a business you cannot do anything about that. so, for

that reason, i don't think that flexing this can really count toward the type of these one to seek tenuously along the frontage of the building on all sides and i think we need to think about not approving the approval for the flex unit space. other than that, i would love to talk more about whether or not there's a potential to expand the trade shop retail space potentially into the parking. again, not having seen the numbers i would love to be able to talk about that option if we can, but that's where the one change i really would like to see star with the flex unit to see what we can do. in terms of the uses in there, i understand trade shop is a subsidiary underneath retail retail is different than pdr. some of the more heavier uses the studio some things of that nature, are not detailed. i get that. so, i would love to hear what other commissioners think about the mix of trade shop

versus pdr. in my mind, i could be open to multiple different mixes get out of the nest the all pdr. i'm certainly not going to be supportive whipping all trade shop or retail could i think let's start talking about flexing units and whether not they could be a different mix of trade shops and pdr. >> commissioner moore >> we spent a lot of time on this project. after listening to powerful public comments, i sit here and feel this project is still too far apart on too many fronts. the community is worried about it slow demise were rather despised demise for me it's shocking to see the trade unions are not supporting this project. it's probably the very first time in my 12 years

on this commission of doing this and will not always agree with unions, i support union labor and what it does for the city. however, i've never heard the union stand here and say what they said today. that leaves me concerned. without common ground i'm interested in seeing the land dedication as an idea. however, when i look at the land dedication as delineated in this project, i believe and it's inequitable project which when i look at it more closely, does not create the balance between two projects which complement each other. let me be specific about that. by splitting the locked into two parcels the use of midblock allie tries to circumvent the drawing unit expose holes. the allie is

shown a 25 foot allie using its visual depiction of the tenderloin as an analog. however, the building from the tenderloin are only four stories tall. here were talking about six stories and what that really means is the units on the affordable as well is on the market based will be mostly in shadow and below, the floors the darker it will get. that means that the idea is contrary to the planning mandates [inaudible] east west allis to allow for adequate daylight. this is the north-south allie but the problems are the datadirect shadow creates the bottom of the allie primary shadow. that being said, i believe that the legal

complications, which come in with the allie in the way the city attorney described it mandates that the mayor's office and the affordable portion of this project has its own architect first and designs the project that needs meets the expectations for all of those things which matter in good quality unit design before it enters into a deal around the currently delineated project. i do not want to discuss the market rate portion of it. that project has a number of shortcomings from my perspective but that is not what i'm focusing on right now. given that we gave this group 2 weeks time to come up with negotiations by themselves. i believe that i cannot support approving the project tonight.

i can either take a position of denying it were asking it be continued so that those negotiations that come from it ultimately create for me a more balanced weight of the community vision and visions partnering with basic common ground being defined. >> commissioner richards >> i guess we heard from project sponsor and i will hear from heaven i like to organize opposition any specifically ms. khan to comment. we did sit here a couple of weeks: heard that money would be raised. there be a new model where the investment by the unions and by syndicate to actually be able to subsidize affordable housing it can you totally i think how did that when and where did it end up? >> the initial offer was proximally $5 million to labor trust fund and i had committed to raise another $5 billion

privately with various individuals were successful in the tech industry and wanted to do something for affordable housing. we didn't have anything concrete because the investors needed to know what we were asking and then we didn't know where the negotiations wanted go. but there was a commitment the money was there if we came up with some way of doing it. so, we were looking at well what this trust fund fiduciary responsibility for the members require and it was about 6% return, and our people were anywhere between 3-5%, but when there wasn't anything really to use her money for because mr. o'dell had mentioned that his money was pretty inexpensive as well. we were looking at this investment as a possible used as a bridge fund until the -start command and o'dell was

saying his construction loan is not a problem for imagery is more of the long-term financing that was his problem. we just didn't have anywhere to go with it. we have $10 million, but that's not enough to do anything with without buy-in from both sides and adjusted not work out. we try. >> you did look at the financials in the community. how did that go? >> i personally do not look at it in fact, none of us the mayor's office brought his financials and came and told us we presented our own proposal based on our analysis. we were pretty close in estimating what came to and what we actually came up with is we were offering well it does crunch when you-condo and make it homeownership because you don't have to incorporate the thousand dollars per unit property taxes that you would rentals. on the non-affordable side. so, the community caucus

realized we would actually prefer condos because at that price point, we rather see families who were going to live there longer-term than the table price point on the rental would be a lot of transitory tech kids be crashing on the floor. so, we offered that would be a solution because then we would have the economics would work out that we figured we would make at least $69-what was the number? 18 million dollars in profit which we thought was pretty good but o'dell's business plan is to do rentals and not be obligated for the 10 years that builders are obligated to either get really expensive insurance or be open to lawsuits for design errors and construction problems. so, his policy is more just build them, sell them and move on. that was it. >> okay. anything else you want to add?

>> love quite a few questions as far as when i read there several cu's that are being proposed good when i read if you have a asset more than 200 feet wide, you're supposed to do a midblock thing inside of that mass. not at the edges of a. so, i'm curious, not a planner i don't know but that's how i would reading this code. it seemed that this midblock allie that's going to provide the affordable with a non-affordable is on the edge is of actually breaking up that 200 foot wide you. that is a planning thing i don't know that maybe guys know by now. >> is that the only thing left it on your mind you i talk about? >> welcome audio signal we think the traffic the more cars the neighborhood would be a problem and that since sell space on the arts of acg was 35 years as everybody eloquently

has testified, should be in the city supported, these should be replaced. so, we are proposing several times that the economics were not different building a soft shelled art studio space than would be to build a parking space. the neighbors seem to be concerned about this entrance the alarm going every time at car exited the parking lot. so at the pre-opposition meetings there were no planners to listen to but at the first meeting the committee was more concerned were equal amounts concerned about losing their free parking on the street to the other saying we don't want were cars in a big development, and they were saying that they don't want parking. so, we would love-and that was we were talking about in negotiations-and there is more money on the table that i believe would say they're just

waiting until the supervisors forced them to shell out the final money that there is actually available could i would think very based solution would be replacing the parking pvr space and i would then place lost art space. run the director of the pacific hill country to same address to get a salary so it's kind of like my volunteer work. we're a bunch of artists in the middle the market rate development and their the quietest people in the world. so we have no problems with the market rate neighbors those above us and alongside of us and we shared easements of entry and exiting and this is the kind of thing that makes us the community on that block. the huge block that would make this place back to the vibrant neighborhood it was before >> so how many thousand

square feet? do you remember? >> 10,000. actually, jonathan could tell you everything about sell space. >> i think were good, jonathan. thank you so 10,000 ft.2 they're offering 7000 of the affordable housing building. then there's an additional >> it's very generous of them to say we should take that burden. 50% of our ground floor on the third of the sliver of land were getting is going to be almost more than what he's doing two thirds of that amount of space. so, it's nice for them to recommend that if we want pvr we have to build it at the expense of affordable housing, of which there's a huge crisis, versus at the expense of a parking space. that's how i look at this >> so more or less the community would prefer pdr over parking? >> the community would prefer all ground for pvr and definitely we don't need parking. it seemed built for the future where cars would be

driving around without even a driver and as it is not that i live, plot and visit google busstop at the corner could there seven different buses within three blocks good uber guys come and go that universal café good i don't see a lot of cars in my own parking space. the parking at the bryant square parking space and have them actually are empty. i don't own a car. nobody and that neighborhood needs a cut. >> thank you maybe project sponsor mr. reynolds and mr. o'dell at a couple more questions of you know my kid i know it's getting late. so, let's talk about-i want to parlay after commissioner johnson and commissioner hillis and talk about what commissioner moore had mentioned it would retail your bringing in five and change per square foot, something like that ? did more or less >> pr space, three bucks?

>> a little less >> the parking when you rental with that equate to in those constant dollar terms? >> within about 250 but other than spite, all of my neighbors other than spite all my neighbors ask for part. that's all they asked for >> i would point out 42% >> supervisor avalos: so we are about half as of right now. we really have to squeeze the garage plus >> supervisor avalos: was a very small garage at this point >> item of the rate in the census will not a lot of residential but generally, it's .5210 little bit under that. think about the future some imagine we talk about this where were looking at even though car rates. i guess my thought would be we like to maybe get more pdr. an awfully

big café good maybe it's an italian restaurant trade shop retail 3300. and then the flex units are about 1000 each. to get more pdr space there, either to try to cut some of that and maybe take a little bit of the parking that's on the east side, six also something like that. >> those are three each. >> three. okay that's kind of where i'd like to go with this. the other thing is >> if you want to look at it on the overhead? >> please. >> overhead, please. >> off i'd like hopefully to get 15,000 ft.2 of pdr. you afford in the pdr already. the trade shops another three. that's about 7.5. there's 12 by five. your awfully close. to

getting 15 maybe even more pdr space for nice big arts group but i guess thoughts on that? >> one thing i would point out when were asking parlay about the space commits about 5000 pdr space on the ground plus another couple thousand in the mezzanine. so it's not it's more like a third of the ground floor, not a half. >> okay. >> on our site, were closer to a third or a half rainout. we still got to get the lobbies the utilities in there. we do they much hope to have a nice neighborhood café at the corner, but that does leave some availability. particularly,we could probably go pdr to go along with the pdr in the alley we do think the flex units are nice feature here. and recently can commit to try to reserve those flex spaces for artisans and makers

and [inaudible] not to just be transit residential units but there at grade units. there's no stoop there at grade units. they have a mezzanine so the be quite functional the kind of partisan maker workspace. >> okay. with the 7000 ft.2 of pdr space in the other building and with this, leaving that to 15, even a little more than that were getting up there in terms of the thing getting us with the community would need or what the world had actually replace some of the stuff we were taking away, so i really hope that's what we would go with this conversation. two more questions could i do want to be- >> one other point to make it is another trade shop that we could certainly convert to pdr.

there's about closer to get about 4000 feet. >> thank. >> so 11,000 to 50,000. we did were getting up there. that's much better. thanks. two of the questions i have based on what ms. cons comments the $10 million to get this thing subsidized. thought? >> i do not understand what you said. >> was a $10 million investment and market return. that doesn't [inaudible] >> on a rental. one last-two more comments. i apologize. commissioner moore mention the issue being can you fill us on in how the discussion went? was it circular? was a linear? okay, thank you i'll move on.

commissioner moore asked whether it would make more sense to design before the housing building because of the narrow alloway the 25 foot and exceptions because i believe the afford housing building is going to be not sick stories. it's going to be higher. you can ago >> were either looking at six or eight. be dick assume it's going to be a. >> i've make the point and outer court which is a court that is opening up both ends 25 feet is the standard. there's no unit exposure exception either for outer court. >> even 85 foot good okay. okay that's all i have. thank you. >> commissioner antonini >> yes, few questioned it in summary, it is that your time mr. bell we are up to 15,000 pdr in the market rate size. >> the two sides. about 87

>> affordable and, if you make those changes that you outlined. remember, your talk about taking away one of the trade shops >> two changeups to >> to trade shops for pdr think of another space i cannot identify which was a large one you are going to convert to pdr? >> we talked with a large trade shop and i think the smaller one on florida street. >> i guess the one was really large and the other one was smaller. so collectively, when you add those into the pdr, which you are having a plan what is your total pdr? >> on the market site you would be out 8000 and on the other side would be 7000 but would like to point out the mayor's office of housing does not want to build parking. on the market rates that we have feel we have to sump you where a very small race. very difficult the project of this size ms. neighborhood with zero parking. >> okay. the other issue that came up commissioner moore type

of the architecture, but it's 1% affordable, it does not have to come back to us for any kind of approval. once the mayor's office comes up with it, designed, it will be built and hopefully it will be compatible with the building that's been built here and take into consideration the space. so i guess you don't have any room to widen them use any? is that >> your use market rate housing. there's [inaudible] this block is 400 feet long. may block alloys are only required on blocks longer than 400 feet. so it isn't a requirement for the medlock alley on the stock it is a voluntary midblock alley. the original requirement is horizontal mass reduction started the third floor and going 60 feet deep. that is the exception were s seeking instead of science the third

floor were starting at the ground floor and being 200 feet deep. rather than 30 feet wide is 25 zero. there's a slight modification of the horizontal mass reduction. this homemade block alley exception needed. he took okay. i'm fine with that. i can see some possible shadowing the may occur one or both of the sides but i'm fine that it is not possible to make it white. a little wider might help a little bit, especially if you're doing the exception for the setbac >> there's no setback required >> okay. the other smoking up is the possibility of bringing the parking down a little bit to try that a little more pdr. i don't know what you think about eliminating a few parking spaces there and gain maybe

another little bit of pdr. >> as i said were down 2.42. >> i know you're pretty low all right. okay the most were going to get is the 15,000 pdr between the two sites. so, i would be fine with that. i want to see with the other commissioners have an prepared to make a motion because it sounds like were moving in the right direction. >> commissioner hillis >> just a follow-up on pvr space. i think looking at the plans and how the ground floor paid out, i would not want us to be too prescriptive as to where it is. so i'll be supportive of at least 15,000 ft.2 of pvr on the ground floor and 10,000 of that because i think it's a bit chopped up now. it has to be contiguously you could have something like an art studio or sell space height entity it an ugly looking for that type of space. that's what i'd like to see in this pdr. they can reconfigure the ground floor and try to get other

retail if desired but i think we heard a lot from neighbors or people in the neighborhood who want to see, who thought a café was important for. here i like to at least see 15,000 10,000 contiguous >> if i can comment on that i think 10,000 contiguous is tough to do in mixed-use building with other core functions in the building. i'm not sure we can accommodate 10,000 contiguous. >> contiguous vehicle from your café retail connect over to the flex units are now. >> you've got utilities. you've got >> i got. i hear you. >> was that nothing about it in the complex building like this is more difficult.

>> may i, commissioner >> sure. >> i hear what you're saying and the easiest is to turn the flex spaces on florida into pdr. this plan is a long time coming. when sf, when i first showed them on version to a large 10,000 ft.2 or 14 ft.2 pdr space under the building they said forget that. no one wants that in your building. give us we kill frontage. incubator size spaces. on the

retail side, is already deeper than most retailers want it. >> but if you connect me of a hallway by mcafee and retail spree must use of the café in retail. if you combine that not saying you have to use it as 10,000 ft.2, but instead have the ability to be cut upward use 10,000 contiguous to buying your café flex units to 10,000. >> yes >> that's contiguous to >> just to clarify, i think i know what you're saying >> i'm trying not to be overly prescriptive but if that could possibly be used them for more than just-these units, these four flex units are approximate 1000 each plus is 550 it's 4500 on our 4000, >> i'm just saying you can do about it. >> i'm sorry, plus this one. that's about 9000. on our sites. if we do everything on from that yellow alley back to the-as pdr, one, two,

three,-six pieces. those are approximately 5000 ft.2. which would 4000 gets us 29. to nine. basically, everything on florida, except for the corner of florida and 18. >> i don't be prescriptive of how you want to do it. it is one be prescriptive and how much space we can get. >> is 9000 okay? >> no. i don't think-but we'll see what others say. thank you. >> commissioner richards >> mr. reynolds, mr. dell please come back. i'm sorry. can you come back what it is you are willing to change? >> yes. >> just so i'm clear.

>> to me go back to the screen? so, the quickest and easiest, is everything on florida from this cornerback to the alley is proximally 5000 ft.2. this is approximately 4000 ft.2. so that's 9000 right there. >> the trade shop >> and the retail >>), how much is that? >> i showed my books as demanded and i'm at the edge of what i can do and i think the mayor's office acknowledged that i am close to on financial

and the retailers important part of that are a wide. so, now i forgot which one but five dollars versus 2.50 is significant. we took. >> asked a question maybe you can answer. on a coffee roaster i saw a copy for my roaster. is that a flex space? is that a trade shop was a café? where would that fall? and all three? café? it's not manufacturing beings. making-if you make something >> i suppose your manufacture. i think your light manufacturing if your processing beans on-site. >> that's kind of what i was thinking in the trade shop ease. that's what i had in mind. >> just to be clear, that is more likely to be pdr because which can answer this i think that in any of us there's a

limit. you can assert amount of accessories retail in pdr. >> right. >> i mean a coffee roaster is 85 or 95% and 10% is retail. >> so the coffee roaster on valencia the very big one with parking big roasting plant in the back and that's not a pdr. that's a- >> i don't know >> retailers to higher percentage for pdr. >> got it. okay, thank you. so you're offering 9000 instead of 10. >> that's the quickest and easiest. >> thank you. just to make sure i understand, you raise some issues but i want to make sure you've probably heard before we move this thing. you said something that wrote down

i can recall the context. some occult stealth plan. what do you mean? >> we think there's a huge mismatch in the eir that came before the eastern neighbor plan a company wasn't as it was called presidential pdr zoning and later was called simply you and you zoning that talked about as you see on your sheet that i did it, it talked about retaining pdr at a prescribed level. that was the basis for the eir to do pdr and its prescriptive loss that were all aware of. then me going to the final plan, somehow at the last second that most of the community having any sense of it, poof, the idea prescriptive retention is been part of the suddenly happens and zero complete mismatch between the eir and the actual eastern neighborhoods plan for pdr loss. i just want to correct-can i correct when the facts? i heard 15% is what

we've gone through in the eastern neighborhood pdr. i think we all think john can confirm this, we have numbers which show in fact it's not 15% of combined seven and eight pipeline and bills pdr lost its 61% in the mission plan is what the losses that. something to the effect of 17/30. isn't the number shown in that chart i sent it to you a number of times. >> we have a map here that says when in the mission and pdr. you can see it says 15% of total. you can see the project. red and blue. you are saying this is 61%? >> different number you're talking about that that's what the er our number is, john? >> that was converted to space. >> overlay of projects built in pipeline in the mission at this was submitted by the

project sponsor in the control report >> i think would talk about two different things. correct me if i'm wrong, pure but i think what you're talking about is the amount of the eir into status are not a pdr lost. i think we are talking about is the amount about loss that actually occurred. >> writes. i'm saying that i forget what the exact but 60.5% is lost pipeline plus was built in that number comes from because it's correct to say that the eir that there was and i can expand more than any most candidate was initially they thought we would've some kind of pdr replacement policy in the zone. however they do not make it into the plan however. having said that, the eir get into status substantial loss of pdr space. we have not yet lost as much space as anticipated, but we've lost a lot. i do.

anybody can pressure back. we're still not there. you're saying but 60 printer i can remember but >> were little over 60% of eir in terms of losing >> were only 7/25 years. will be at 60% >> sure. i think that 60% is not good everything that's been approved. also includes things in the pipeline >> that matches up with the chart. >> great, thanks. one of the things i like to say before i make a motion here, we sit here and approved projects at 12%, 15%, 17, i sit here and i squirm and go, you know the nexus study says we need .4% for every market rate unity at this project is to deliver that. i think a handful projects that actually is delivering what's needed. i understand my

heart goes out and i'm still struggling with the loss of the population, the older existing population because no housing gets built or because newhouse and gets built. i'm not convinced it's one way or the other. i think some induced demand but i think as well warmly approved 1198 valencia ruby adding 12 units here that some these not going to be evicting some of the out-of-date rental unit. i still struggled with as i did read the berkeley report but i think it's a little bit of both, and i think it's not just the housing thing it's a stabilizing housing it's preventing loss of housing. i thought sat through a short-term rental housing that oh i think it's all these things about try to help us to even move out of this situation we are in. so i want to go on record that i think this project is going to go far